Industry Products

Bloomberg Customers

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

A cookie is a piece of data stored by your browser or device that helps websites like this one recognize return visitors. We use cookies to give you the best experience on BNA.com. Some cookies are also necessary for the technical operation of our website. If you continue browsing, you agree to this site’s use of cookies.

Your HR and Payroll compliance and policy solution! Comply with federal, state, and international laws, find answers to your most challenging questions, get timely updates with email alerts, and more with our suite of products.

Industry representatives who are asked to testify before Congress better come prepared
with verifiable data because senators are no longer putting up with platitudes about
costs and job losses caused by over-regulation.

An otherwise routine Senate Commerce Committee hearing Feb. 1 into the burdens of
regulations exposed deep divides and frustrations by senators unable to get specific
data from the industry witnesses.

“My hope is that today’s hearing will examine how we can make the rhetoric of regulatory
reform a reality,”
said Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), chairman of the committee, in his opening remarks.

But after sharp exchanges throughout the hearing, including discussion of the “arbitrary”
nature of President Donald Trump’s executive order requiring agencies to eliminate
two regulations for every one issued, several senators appeared exasperated.

Unusual Forum

The Senate Commerce Committee, which does not have jurisdiction over administrative
law and regulatory policy, is an unusual forum for debate of regulatory policy.

Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M.), for example, said that industry was advocating repeal of
the Bureau of Land Management’s methane and waste prevention rule. But there has not
been, at least at the state level, any loss of jobs because of this rule, he said.

Two big oil and gas states, Wyoming and Colorado, also have passed rules to reduce
waste, Udall said.

Hard Data Wanted

“This is what we need to get down to,”
Udall said. “Do you have any published data that you could share with this committee,
whether any jobs have been lost as a direct result of Wyoming and Colorado’s waste
prevention rules?” he asked.

Jack Gerard, president and CEO of the American Petroleum Institute, said he would
go back and provide all the data they had.

“Well, I want to know the hard data,”
Udall said, cutting off Gerard. “That’s because you all are in here telling us that
these regulations are over the top and we’re losing jobs. I’m picking a regulation—you
tell me the hard data.”

Rather than job losses, Gerard said, he had data on the revenue impact of the rule.
“This rule is estimated to cost us $400 million,” he said.

Cost Estimate Not Credible

Discussions about regulation often ignore its benefits and fixate solely on its costs,
said Lisa Heinzerling, professor of law at Georgetown Law Center.

Information about costs often comes from the industry itself, which has an incentive
to overstate costs in the hopes of preventing regulation, Heinzerling said.

And, the errors are even more glaring in estimates of the total costs of regulation
to society, Heinzerling said. One perennial favorite of those trying to make regulation
look outlandishly expensive is a study that purports to estimate the total annual
cost of regulation in the U.S., she said.

The most recent version was put out by the National Association of Manufacturers,
estimating that regulation costs $2 trillion per year, Heinzerling said. This report
is not credible because of its many flaws, such as including the costs of regulations
that do not exist, were withdrawn or are decades old and fully implemented, she said.

To contact the reporter on this story: Cheryl Bolen in Washington at
cbolen@bna.com

To contact the editor responsible for this story:
Paul Hendrie at
pHendrie@bna.com

All Bloomberg BNA treatises are available on standing order, which ensures you will always receive the most current edition of the book or supplement of the title you have ordered from Bloomberg BNA’s book division. As soon as a new supplement or edition is published (usually annually) for a title you’ve previously purchased and requested to be placed on standing order, we’ll ship it to you to review for 30 days without any obligation. During this period, you can either (a) honor the invoice and receive a 5% discount (in addition to any other discounts you may qualify for) off the then-current price of the update, plus shipping and handling or (b) return the book(s), in which case, your invoice will be cancelled upon receipt of the book(s). Call us for a prepaid UPS label for your return. It’s as simple and easy as that. Most importantly, standing orders mean you will never have to worry about the timeliness of the information you’re relying on. And, you may discontinue standing orders at any time by contacting us at 1.800.960.1220 or by sending an email to books@bna.com.

Put me on standing order at a 5% discount off list price of all future updates, in addition to any other discounts I may quality for. (Returnable within 30 days.)

Notify me when updates are available (No standing order will be created).

This Bloomberg BNA report is available on standing order, which ensures you will all receive the latest edition. This report is updated annually and we will send you the latest edition once it has been published. By signing up for standing order you will never have to worry about the timeliness of the information you need. And, you may discontinue standing orders at any time by contacting us at 1.800.372.1033, option 5, or by sending us an email to research@bna.com.

Put me on standing order

Notify me when new releases are available (no standing order will be created)